Guest guest Posted April 21, 2004 Report Share Posted April 21, 2004 Dear Kasturi Rangan These guidelines are excellent - but can we also apply them to the anya devatas? Every mantra can also be said to be directed to Brahma or Shiva? There are fewer mantras to Shiva than to Vishnu - so can we say that paucity is the sign of excellence? There is only two Suktas to Mitra - so does this mean that Mitra is the supreme? (being also a form of the Adityas of whom Vishnu is a member?) Adiyen Dasosmiham Sri Ram > (1) whenever you read a mantra addressed to agni, read it as a one > addressed to vishnu, as vishNu is antaryami of everybody... > (antaryami logic) > (2) argument against frequency of occurance: you spend 12 years in > high school but only 4 years in college. Similarly, you study a lot > of mantras addressed to various devatas but only a few mantras on > vishNu. College education is more complex and "higher" than high > school education. Similarly, mantras addressed to "vishNu" > are "higher" than other dEvatas. > (maybe more as we go along) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2004 Report Share Posted April 24, 2004 Dear Sriram, You hit the nail on its head. I posted those two "guidelines" mentioning that I would be offering my humble opinions on why those are incorrect. You already provided the counter-point for "agrument against frequency of mantras". I'll go ahead for the "antaryami logic". Here are some mantras from Rig veda, loosely translated. 1. "Agni, we approach you like a son towards his father..." Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of agni! we approach you like a son towards his father..." 2. "King VaruNa! No sinner escapes your noose... you maintain the cosmic order (rta)..." Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of varuNa! you maintain the cosmic order, nobody escapes your noose etc." 3. "Indra! You bull! we sons (or children) sacrifice unto you with soma. Accept our offering...." Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of Indra!, we sons ...." Now, here is the interesting part: 4. "VishNu the bull, far-stepper, far-goer made three steps and from his feet all these were created..." Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of VishNu...." wait, wait! You should not apply antaryami logic for this particular mantra. Why not? Because we made up the rules arbitrarily? If this is arbitrary, may be King VaruNa can be replaced for vishNu in mantras 1, 3 and 4. There is no justification for choosing one option over other. This is my argument against antaryami logic - There is no specific rule on what mantras require antaryami logic and what doesn't. Regards, Kasturi Rangan .K ramanuja, <purohit@b...> wrote: > Dear Kasturi Rangan > > These guidelines are excellent - but can we also apply them to the anya > devatas? Every mantra can also be said to be directed to Brahma or Shiva? > There are fewer mantras to Shiva than to Vishnu - so can we say that paucity > is the sign of excellence? There is only two Suktas to Mitra - so does this > mean that Mitra is the supreme? (being also a form of the Adityas of whom > Vishnu is a member?) > > Adiyen > > Dasosmiham > > Sri Ram > > > > (1) whenever you read a mantra addressed to agni, read it as a one > > addressed to vishnu, as vishNu is antaryami of everybody... > > (antaryami logic) > > (2) argument against frequency of occurance: you spend 12 years in > > high school but only 4 years in college. Similarly, you study a lot > > of mantras addressed to various devatas but only a few mantras on > > vishNu. College education is more complex and "higher" than high > > school education. Similarly, mantras addressed to "vishNu" > > are "higher" than other dEvatas. > > (maybe more as we go along) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 ramanuja, "amshuman_k" <amshuman_k> wrote: > Dear Sriram, > > Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of Indra!, we > sons ...." > > Now, here is the interesting part: > 4. "VishNu the bull, far-stepper, far-goer made three steps and from > his feet all these were created..." > Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of VishNu...." wait, > wait! You should not apply antaryami logic for this particular > mantra. Why not? Because we made up the rules arbitrarily? Dear Sriman Kasturi Rangan, Here we need not say Vishnu, the antaryAmI of vishNu, since Vishnu Himself is the antaryAmI, as His very name indicates so. viSatIti vishNu: one Who enters, this has to be understood as one Who has entered everything. Also we have mantras which say, as you know, antarbahiScha tat sarvam vyApya nArAyaNa: sthita:.. etc. Ramanuja Dasan Vishnu .. > If this is arbitrary, may be King VaruNa can be replaced for vishNu > in mantras 1, 3 and 4. There is no justification for choosing one > option over other. > This is my argument against antaryami logic - There is no specific > rule on what mantras require antaryami logic and what doesn't. > > Regards, > Kasturi Rangan .K > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Dear Vishnu, My original problem statement was that we should not go beyond vedic texts. Seen from that light, extending the meaning of "to enter" or "to pervade" to include spatio-temporal and psycho-somatic pervasion is uncalled for from Rig Vedic sUktas. Traditional Indian bhashyakartas (and European sanskritists after them) offer a "solar interpretation", where the pervasion simply means pervasion of sun's rays and this might very well be true. (I find lot of holes in this interpretation is a different story). Excuse me for a digression and poor analogy - There is a movie called "Being John Malcovich" - The premise is that, there is a mysterious room in a mysterious story in a building and it contains a portal into the mind of John Malcovich. One gets to look and see through the eyes and mind of him. One day, John malcovich accidentally enters the portal. He sees all people as himself, (in restaurant for e.g.) and all he hears is "malcovich.. john malcovich ..." Coming back to main topic, here are some "correct interpretations" of certain Rig mantras. 1. Vishnu slayed vishnu and released vishNus. 2. Vishnu and vishnu trampled on the dead bodies of vishnus. etc. and the incorrect interpretations are 1. Indra slayed vrtra and released the waters. 2. Indra and vishnu trampled on the dead bodies of dasyus. I would much prefer the "incorrect" interpretations - The "correct" interpretation looks like "Being John Malcovich" to me. Things begin to get funny when you apply this interpretation to Indo- Iranian Avestan religion. Well, one might object saying why should we apply this interpretation to different religion and close their eyes to "sacrificing unto vayu", verethraghna, mithra and ahura, athrawan and zaotar priests, offering haoma etc. If these remind one of vayu, Indra vrtrahan, mithra and varuna, atharvan and hotr priests and offering soma, it is a solid start. If time permits, I'll post about ten incarnations of the Indo-Iranian Verethraghna, which includes boar and dwarf. Regards, Kasturi Rangan .K ramanuja, "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu> wrote: > ramanuja, "amshuman_k" <amshuman_k> wrote: > > Dear Sriram, > > > > Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of Indra!, we > > sons ...." > > > > Now, here is the interesting part: > > 4. "VishNu the bull, far-stepper, far-goer made three steps and > from > > his feet all these were created..." > > Correct interpretation: "Vishnu, the antaryami of VishNu...." wait, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.